The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC AG PKT 2012-01-09 #JAGENDA STAFF REPORT DATE: January 9, 2012 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager FROM: Mark H. Persico, AICP, Director of Development Services SUBJECT: SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY �F SEAC e°•. icy SS 4 cQ�(FORN�� SUMMARY OF REQUEST: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6211 electing for the City to serve as the successor agency to the Seal Beach Redevelopment Agency. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: This agenda item addresses the outcome of the California Supreme Court's decision in Califomia Redevelopment Association, et al. v. Matosantos, et al. (Case No. S194861), the litigation challenging AB X1 26 ( "AB 26) and AB X1 27( "AB 27 "). The Court largely upheld AB 26, which provides for the windup and dissolution of redevelopment agencies, and invalidated in its entirety AB 27, which provides for an alternative voluntary redevelopment program. The Court held that AB 26 may be severed from AB 27 and enforced independently. In summary, as a result of the decision, all redevelopment agencies will be dissolved as of February 1, 2012, and cities do not have the option of making remittance payments to enable the continued operation of redevelopment agencies. Accordingly, a successor agency will be designated for each dissolved redevelopment agency and charged with administrating the wind -down of the dissolved redevelopment agency. The attached resolution designates the City to serve as the successor agency for the Seal Beach Redevelopment Agency. AB 26 added Parts 1.8 and 1.85 to the Community Redevelopment Law. Part 1.8 immediately suspended most redevelopment agency activities. Part 1.85 provides that on October 1, 2011 (extended to February 1, 2012 by the Court), all existing redevelopment agencies and redevelopment agency components of community development agencies are dissolved, and successor agencies are designated as successor entities to the former redevelopment agencies. Except for those provisions of the Redevelopment Law that are repealed, restricted, or revised pursuant to AB 26, all authority, rights, powers, duties and obligations Agenda Item J previously vested with the former redevelopment agencies under the Redevelopment Law, are vested in the successor agencies. AB 26 imposes numerous requirements on the successor agencies, including continuing to make payments due for enforceable obligations of the former agency, remit unencumbered balances of the former agency's funds to the county auditor - controller for distribution to the taxing entities, and dispose of assets and properties of the former agency as directed by the oversight board. AB 26, as revised by the Court, requires a city which elects not to serve as a successor agency under Part 1.85 to file a copy of a duly authorized resolution of the city council to that effect with the county auditor - controller no later than January 13, 2012. AB 26 is ambiguous with respect to the timing and the need for a city council to adopt and file a resolution with the county auditor - controller if the city council elects to serve as a successor agency. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: There will be no new environmental impact associated with any of the decisions outlined above. LEGAL ANALYSIS: The City Attorney has reviewed and approved as to form. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The successor agency will be entitled to an annual administrative cost allowance of not less than $250,000 per year, provided that the allowance will exclude any administrative costs that can be paid from bond proceeds or sources other than property tax, and provided that the amount is subject to reduction if there is a shortfall of funds available to make payments to taxing entities and to pay debt service on enforceable obligations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6211 electing for the City to serve as the successor agency. SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED: Mark H. Persico, AICP Director of Development Services W10 i l ' lanager Attachment: A. Resolution No. 6211 Page 2 RESOLUTION NUMBER 6211 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL MAKING AN ELECTION IN CONNECTION WITH SERVING AS A SUCCESSOR AGENCY UNDER PART 1.85 OF DIVISION 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE AND TAKING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH RECITALS: A. The Seal Beach Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency ") is a redevelopment agency in the City of Seal Beach (the "City "), created pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000) of Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code) (the "Redevelopment Law "). B. The City Council of the City (the "City Council ") has adopted a redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area, and from time to time, the City Council has amended such redevelopment plan. C. AB X1 26 and AB X1 27 were signed by the Governor of California on June 29, 2011, making certain changes to the Redevelopment Law, including adding Part 1.8 (commencing with Section 34161) and Part 1.85 (commencing with Section 34170) ( "Part 1.85 ") to Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code. D. The California Redevelopment Association and League of California Cities filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of California alleging that AB X1 26 and AB X1 27 are unconstitutional. On August 11, 2011, the Supreme Court issued a stay order, which was subsequently modified on August 17, 2011. Pursuant to the modified stay order, the Supreme Court granted a partial stay of AB X1 26 and AB X1 27. E. On December 29, 2011, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in California Redevelopment Association, et al. v. Matosantos, et al. (Case No. S194861) largely upholding AB X1 26, invalidating AB X1 27, and holding that AB X1 26 may be severed from AB X1 27 and enforced independently. F. Accordingly, the City Council desires to adopt this resolution electing for the City to serve as the successor agency to the Agency under Part 1.85. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The above recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of this Resolution. Section 2: This Resolution is adopted pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34173. Section 3: The City Council hereby elects for the City to serve as a successor agency under Part 1.85. Section 4: The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor - Controller. Section 5: The officers and staff of the City are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and severally, to do any and all things which they may deem necessary or advisable to effectuate this Resolution, and any such actions previously taken by such officers are hereby ratified and confirmed. Resolution Number 6211 Section 6: The adoption of this Resolution is not intended to and shall not constitute a waiver by the City of any right the City may have to challenge the legality of all or any portion of AB X1 26 through administrative or judicial proceedings. Section 7: This Resolution has been reviewed with respect to applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq., hereafter the "Guidelines "), and the City's environmental guidelines. The City Council has determined that this Resolution is not a "project" for purposes of CEQA, as that term is defined by Guidelines Section 15378, because this Resolution is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment. (Guidelines Section 15378(b) (5)). PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of January , 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members NOES: Council Members ABSENT: Council Members ABSTAIN: Council Members Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH } I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 6211 on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of January 2012. City Clerk